[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 127 (Thursday, July 2, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36298-36318]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-17583]



[[Page 36297]]

_______________________________________________________________________

Part II





Department of Education





_______________________________________________________________________



Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, National 
Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research; Notice Inviting 
Applications for New Awards Under the Disability and Rehabilitation 
Research Project and Centers Program for Fiscal Year (FY) 1998

Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 127/ Thursday, July 2, 1998 / 
Notices

[[Page 36298]]



DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

[CFDA Nos.: 84.133A and 84.133B]


Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services; National 
Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research; Notice Inviting 
Applications for New Awards Under the Disability and Rehabilitation 
Research Project and Centers Program for Fiscal Year (FY) 1998

    Note To Applicants: This notice is a complete application 
package. Together with the statute authorizing the programs and 
applicable regulations governing the programs, including the 
Education Department General Administrative Regulations (EDGAR), 
this notice contains information, application forms, and 
instructions needed to apply for a grant under these competitions.

    On June 8, 1998 the Secretary published in separate parts two 
notices of proposed priorities in the Federal Register. One notice 
included two proposed priorities related to a burn data coordinating 
project and collaborative research for traumatic brain injury (TBI) 
model systems. (63 FR 31320-31321). The second notice included three 
proposed priorities related to: employment opportunities for American 
Indians; community integration for persons with mental retardation; and 
policies affecting families of children with disabilities. (63 FR 
31324-313290).
    In order to provide applicants with a 60-day application period and 
to ensure that these grants are awarded before the end of FY 1998, 
NIDRR is inviting applications based on the proposed priorities 
published on June 8, 1998. NIDRR will publish the final priorities as 
soon as possible after the comment period closes on July 8, 1998. 
Depending upon the comments that NIDRR receives, the final priorities 
may include revisions to the proposed priorities. It is the policy of 
the Department of Education not to solicit applications before the 
publication of final priorities. However, in this case it is essential 
to solicit applications on the basis of the proposed priorities in 
order to allow applicants sufficient time to prepare applications of 
appropriate quality to be funded. Applicants are advised to begin to 
develop their applications based on the proposed priorities. If changes 
are made in the final priorities, applicants will be given a chance to 
revise or resubmit their applications.
    As of the publication of this notice inviting applications, NIDRR 
had received two substantive comments addressing the proposed 
priorities. The first comment suggested revising the priority on 
collaborative research for TBI model systems to address the needs of 
individuals in correctional facilities. The second comment suggested 
that applicants for the burn data coordinating project demonstrate an 
understanding of burn care and the burn model systems database, and 
possess the technology to respond to idiosyncratic hardware and 
software needs and issues that each burn model system brings to the 
common database. In the notice of final priorities, NIDRR will provide 
its analysis of these comments and others that are received on or 
before July 8, 1998.
    The notice of proposed priority for collaborative research for TBI 
model systems requires the applicants to collaborate with the current 
TBI model systems grantees. The notice of final priority for 
collaborative research for TBI model systems will include the names and 
telephone numbers of the TBI model systems grantees.
    This program supports the National Education Goal that calls for 
all Americans to possess the knowledge and skills necessary to compete 
in a global economy and exercise the rights and responsibilities of 
citizenship.
    The estimated funding levels in this notice do not bind the 
Department of Education to make awards in any of these categories, or 
to any specific number of awards or funding levels, unless otherwise 
specified in statute.
    Applicable Regulations: The Education Department General 
Administrative Regulations (EDGAR), 34 CFR Parts 74, 75, 77, 80, 81, 
82, 85, 86, and 34 CFR part 350.
    Program Title: Disability and Rehabilitation Research Project and 
Centers Program.
    CFDA Numbers: 84.133A and 84.133B.
    Purpose of Program: The purpose of the Disability and 
Rehabilitation Research Project and Centers Program is to plan related 
activities, including international activities, to develop methods, 
procedures, and rehabilitation technology, that maximize the full 
inclusion and integration into society, employment, independent living, 
family support, and economic and social self-sufficiency of individuals 
with disabilities, especially individuals with the most severe 
disabilities. In addition, the purpose of the Disability and 
Rehabilitation Research Project and Centers Program is to improve the 
effectiveness of services authorized under the Act (34 CFR 350.2).
    Eligible Applicants: Parties eligible to apply for grants under 
this program are States, public or private agencies, including for-
profit agencies, public or private organizations, including for-profit 
organizations, institutions of higher education, and Indian tribes and 
tribal organizations.
    Program Authority: 29 U.S.C. 762.

    Application Notice for Fiscal Year 1998 Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects, CFDA No. 84-133A   
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Deadline for      Estimated     Maximum award                
                Funding priority                  transmittal of     number of      amount (per   Project period
                                                   applications       awards         year) \1\       (months)   
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Burn Data Coordinating Project..................         8/31/98               1        $125,000              48
Collaborative Research for Traumatic Brain                                                                      
 Injury Model Systems...........................         8/31/98            8-10        $300,000             48 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Note: The Secretary will reject without consideration or evaluation any application that proposes a project 
  funding level that exceeds the stated maximum award amount per year (See 34 CFR 75.104(b)).                   

Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects--Burn Data 
Coordinating Project

    Selection Criteria: The Secretary uses the following selection 
criteria to evaluate applications for a Burn Data Coordinating Project 
under the Disability and Rehabilitation Research Project and Centers 
Program.
    (a) Responsiveness to an absolute or competitive priority (15 
points total).
    (1) The Secretary considers the responsiveness of the application 
to the absolute or competitive priority published in the Federal 
Register.
    (2) In determining the responsiveness of the application to the 
absolute or competitive priority, the Secretary considers the following 
factors:

[[Page 36299]]

    (i) The extent to which the applicant addresses all requirements of 
the absolute or competitive priority (9 points).
    (ii) The extent to which the applicant's proposed activities are 
likely to achieve the purposes of the absolute or competitive priority 
(6 points).
    (b) Design of technical assistance activities (20 points total).
    (1) The Secretary considers the extent to which the design of 
technical assistance activities is likely to be effective in 
accomplishing the objectives of the project.
    (2) In determining the extent to which the design is likely to be 
effective in accomplishing the objectives of the project, the Secretary 
considers the following factors:
    (i) The extent to which the methods for providing technical 
assistance are of sufficient quality, intensity, and duration (6 
points).
    (ii) The extent to which the information to be provided through 
technical assistance covers all of the relevant aspects of the subject 
matter (8 points).
    (iii) The extent to which the technical assistance is appropriate 
to the target population, including consideration of the knowledge 
level of the target population, needs of the target population, and 
format for providing information (6 points).
    (c) Plan of operation (10 points total).
    (1) The Secretary considers the quality of the plan of operation.
    (2) In determining the quality of the plan of operation, the 
Secretary considers the adequacy of the plan of operation to achieve 
the objectives of the proposed project on time and within budget, 
including clearly defined responsibilities, and timelines for 
accomplishing project tasks (10 points).
    (d) Collaboration (16 points total).
    (1) The Secretary considers the quality of collaboration.
    (2) In determining the quality of collaboration, the Secretary 
considers the following factors:
    (i) The extent to which the applicant's proposed collaboration with 
one or more agencies, organizations, or institutions is likely to be 
effective in achieving the relevant proposed activities of the project 
(8 points).
    (ii) The extent to which agencies, organizations, or institutions 
demonstrate a commitment to collaborate with the applicant (4 points).
    (iii) The extent to which agencies, organizations, or institutions 
that commit to collaborate with the applicant have the capacity to 
carry out collaborative activities (4 points).
    (e) Adequacy and reasonableness of the budget (4 points total).
    (1) The Secretary considers the adequacy and the reasonableness of 
the proposed budget.
    (2) In determining the adequacy and the reasonableness of the 
proposed budget, the Secretary considers the following factors:
    (i) The extent to which the costs are reasonable in relation to the 
proposed project activities (2 points).
    (ii) The extent to which the budget for the project, including any 
subcontracts, is adequately justified to support the proposed project 
activities (2 points).
    (f) Plan of evaluation (10 points total).
    (1) The Secretary considers the quality of the plan of evaluation.
    (2) In determining the quality of the plan of evaluation, the 
Secretary considers the following factors:
    (i) The extent to which the plan of evaluation provides for 
periodic assessment of progress toward--
    (A) Implementing the plan of operation (3 points); and
    (B) Achieving the project's intended outcomes and expected impacts 
(2 points).
    (ii) The extent to which the plan of evaluation provides for 
periodic assessment of a project's progress that is based on identified 
performance measures that--
    (A) Are clearly related to the intended outcomes of the project and 
expected impacts on the target population (3 points); and
    (B) Are objective, and quantifiable or qualitative, as appropriate 
(2 points).
    (g) Project staff (20 points total).
    (1) The Secretary considers the quality of the project staff.
    (2) In determining the quality of the project staff, the Secretary 
considers the extent to which the applicant encourages applications for 
employment from persons who are members of groups that have 
traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national 
origin, gender, age, or disability (2 points).
    (3) In addition, the Secretary considers the following factors:
    (i) The extent to which the key personnel and other key staff have 
appropriate training and experience in disciplines required to conduct 
all proposed activities (7 points).
    (ii) The extent to which the commitment of staff time is adequate 
to accomplish all the proposed activities of the project (4 points).
    (iii) The extent to which the key personnel are knowledgeable about 
the methodology and literature of pertinent subject areas (7 points).
    (h) Adequacy and accessibility of resources (5 points total).
    (1) The Secretary considers the adequacy and accessibility of the 
applicant's resources to implement the proposed project.
    (2) In determining the adequacy and accessibility of resources, the 
Secretary considers the following factors:
    (i) The extent to which the applicant is committed to provide 
adequate facilities, equipment, other resources, including 
administrative support, and laboratories, if appropriate (3 points).
    (ii) The extent to which the facilities, equipment, and other 
resources are appropriately accessible to individuals with disabilities 
who may use the facilities, equipment, and other resources of the 
project (2 points total).

Collaborative Research for Traumatic Brain Injury Model Systems

    Selection Criteria: The Secretary uses the following selection 
criteria to evaluate applications for a Collaborative Research for 
Traumatic Brain Injury Model Systems Project under the Disability and 
Rehabilitation Research Project and Centers Program.
    (a) Responsiveness to an absolute or competitive priority (10 
points total).
    (1) The Secretary considers the responsiveness of the application 
to the absolute or competitive priority published in the Federal 
Register.
    (2) In determining the responsiveness of the application to the 
absolute or competitive priority, the Secretary considers the following 
factors:
    (i) The extent to which the applicant addresses all requirements of 
the absolute or competitive priority (5 points).
    (ii) The extent to which the applicant's proposed activities are 
likely to achieve the purposes of the absolute or competitive priority 
(5 points).
    (b) Design of research activities (30 points total).
    (1) The Secretary considers the extent to which the design of 
research activities is likely to be effective in accomplishing the 
objectives of the project.
    (2) In determining the extent to which the design is likely to be 
effective in accomplishing the objectives of the project, the Secretary 
considers the following factors:
    (i) The extent to which the research activities constitute a 
coherent, sustained approach to research in the field, including a 
substantial addition to the state-of-the-art (7 points).
    (ii) The extent to which the methodology of each proposed research 
activity is meritorious, including consideration of the extent to 
which--
    (A) The proposed design includes a comprehensive and informed 
review of

[[Page 36300]]

the current literature, demonstrating knowledge of the state-of-the-art 
(4 points);
    (B) Each research hypothesis is theoretically sound and based on 
current knowledge (4 points);
    (C) Each sample population is appropriate and of sufficient size (4 
points);
    (D) The data collection and measurement techniques are appropriate 
and likely to be effective (3 points); and
    (E) The data analysis methods are appropriate (3 points).
    (iii) The extent to which anticipated research results are likely 
to satisfy the original hypotheses and could be used for planning 
additional research, including generation of new hypotheses where 
applicable (5 points).
    (c) Design of dissemination activities (5 points total).
    (1) The Secretary considers the extent to which the design of 
dissemination activities is likely to be effective in accomplishing the 
objectives of the project.
    (2) In determining the extent to which the design is likely to be 
effective in accomplishing the objectives of the project, the Secretary 
considers the following factors:
    (i) The extent to which the materials to be disseminated are likely 
to be effective and usable, including consideration of their quality, 
clarity, variety, and format (3 points).
    (ii) The extent to which the materials and information to be 
disseminated and the methods for dissemination are appropriate to the 
target population, including consideration of the familiarity of the 
target population with the subject matter, format of the information, 
and subject matter (2 points).
    (d) Plan of operation (6 points total).
    (1) The Secretary considers the quality of the plan of operation.
    (2) In determining the quality of the plan of operation, the 
Secretary considers the adequacy of the plan of operation to achieve 
the objectives of the proposed project on time and within budget, 
including clearly defined responsibilities, and timelines for 
accomplishing project tasks (6 points).
    (e) Collaboration (15 points total).
    (1) The Secretary considers the quality of collaboration.
    (2) In determining the quality of collaboration, the Secretary 
considers the following factors:
    (i) The extent to which the applicant's proposed collaboration with 
one or more agencies, organizations, or institutions is likely to be 
effective in achieving the relevant proposed activities of the project 
(5 points).
    (ii) The extent to which agencies, organizations, or institutions 
demonstrate a commitment to collaborate with the applicant (5 points).
    (iii) The extent to which agencies, organizations, or institutions 
that commit to collaborate with the applicant have the capacity to 
carry out collaborative activities (5 points).
    (f) Adequacy and reasonableness of the budget (4 points total).
    (1) The Secretary considers the adequacy and the reasonableness of 
the proposed budget.
    (2) In determining the adequacy and the reasonableness of the 
proposed budget, the Secretary considers the following factors:
    (i) The extent to which the costs are reasonable in relation to the 
proposed project activities (2 points).
    (ii) The extent to which the budget for the project, including any 
subcontracts, is adequately justified to support the proposed project 
activities (2 points).
    (g) Plan of evaluation (10 points total).
    (1) The Secretary considers the quality of the plan of evaluation.
    (2) In determining the quality of the plan of evaluation, the 
Secretary considers the following factors:
    (i) The extent to which the plan of evaluation provides for 
periodic assessment of progress toward--
    (A) Implementing the plan of operation (3 points); and
    (B) Achieving the project's intended outcomes and expected impacts 
(2 points).
    (ii) The extent to which the plan of evaluation provides for 
periodic assessment of a project's progress that is based on identified 
performance measures that--
    (A) Are clearly related to the intended outcomes of the project and 
expected impacts on the target population (3 points); and
    (B) Are objective, and quantifiable or qualitative, as appropriate 
(2 points).
    (h) Project staff (15 points total).
    (1) The Secretary considers the quality of the project staff.
    (2) In determining the quality of the project staff, the Secretary 
considers the extent to which the applicant encourages applications for 
employment from persons who are members of groups that have 
traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national 
origin, gender, age, or disability (2 points).
    (3) In addition, the Secretary considers the following factors:
    (i) The extent to which the key personnel and other key staff have 
appropriate training and experience in disciplines required to conduct 
all proposed activities (5 points).
    (ii) The extent to which the commitment of staff time is adequate 
to accomplish all the proposed activities of the project (3 points).
    (iii) The extent to which the key personnel are knowledgeable about 
the methodology and literature of pertinent subject areas (5 points).
    (i) Adequacy and accessibility of resources (5 points total).
    (1) The Secretary considers the adequacy and accessibility of the 
applicant's resources to implement the proposed project.
    (2) In determining the adequacy and accessibility of resources, the 
Secretary considers the following factors:
    (i) The extent to which the applicant is committed to provide 
adequate facilities, equipment, other resources, including 
administrative support, and laboratories, if appropriate (3 points).
    (ii) The extent to which the facilities, equipment, and other 
resources are appropriately accessible to individuals with disabilities 
who may use the facilities, equipment, and other resources of the 
project (2 points total).

     Application Notice for Fiscal Year 1998 Rehabilitation Research and Training Centers, CFDA No. 84-133B     
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Deadline for      Estimated     Maximum award                
                Funding priority                  transmittal of     number of      amount (per   Project period
                                                   applications       awards         year) \1\       (months)   
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Employment Opportunities for American Indians...         8/31/98               1        $600,000              60
Community Integration for Persons with Mental                                                                   
 Retardation....................................         8/31/98               1         700,000              60
Policies Affecting Families of Children with                                                                    
 Disabilities...................................         8/31/98               1         650,000              60
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Note: The Secretary will reject without consideration or evaluation any application that proposes a project 
  funding level that exceeds the stated maximum award amount per year (See 34 CFR 75.104(b)).                   


[[Page 36301]]

Rehabilitation Research and Training Centers

    Selection Criteria: The Secretary uses the following selection 
criteria to evaluate applications for RRTCs on employment opportunities 
for American Indians, community integration for persons with mental 
retardation, and policies affecting families of children with 
disabilities.
    (a) Importance of the problem (9 points total).
    (1) The Secretary considers the importance of the problem.
    (2) In determining the importance of the problem, the Secretary 
considers the following factors:
    (i) The extent to which the applicant clearly describes the need 
and target population (3 points).
    (ii) The extent to which the proposed activities address a 
significant need of those who provide services to individuals with 
disabilities (3 points).
    (iii) The extent to which the proposed project will have beneficial 
impact on the target population (3 points).
    (b) Responsiveness to an absolute or competitive priority (4 points 
total).
    (1) The Secretary considers the responsiveness of the application 
to the absolute or competitive priority published in the Federal 
Register.
    (2) In determining the responsiveness of the application to the 
absolute or competitive priority, the Secretary considers the following 
factors:
    (i) The extent to which the applicant addresses all requirements of 
the absolute or competitive priority (2 points).
    (ii) The extent to which the applicant's proposed activities are 
likely to achieve the purposes of the absolute or competitive priority 
(2 points).
    (c) Design of research activities (35 points total).
    (1) The Secretary considers the extent to which the design of 
research activities is likely to be effective in accomplishing the 
objectives of the project.
    (2) In determining the extent to which the design is likely to be 
effective in accomplishing the objectives of the project, the Secretary 
considers the following factors:
    (i) The extent to which the research activities constitute a 
coherent, sustained approach to research in the field, including a 
substantial addition to the state-of-the-art (5 points).
    (ii) The extent to which the methodology of each proposed research 
activity is meritorious, including consideration of the extent to 
which--
    (A) The proposed design includes a comprehensive and informed 
review of the current literature, demonstrating knowledge of the state-
of-the-art (5 points);
    (B) Each research hypothesis is theoretically sound and based on 
current knowledge (5 points);
    (C) Each sample population is appropriate and of sufficient size (5 
points);
    (D) The data collection and measurement techniques are appropriate 
and likely to be effective (5 points); and
    (E) The data analysis methods are appropriate (5 points).
    (iii) The extent to which anticipated research results are likely 
to satisfy the original hypotheses and could be used for planning 
additional research, including generation of new hypotheses where 
applicable (5 points).
    (d) Design of training activities (11 points total).
    (1) The Secretary considers the extent to which the design of 
training activities is likely to be effective in accomplishing the 
objectives of the project.
    (2) In determining the extent to which the design is likely to be 
effective in accomplishing the objectives of the project, the Secretary 
considers the following factors:
    (i) The extent to which the proposed training materials are likely 
to be effective, including consideration of their quality, clarity, and 
variety (2 points).
    (ii) The extent to which the proposed training methods are of 
sufficient quality, intensity, and duration (2 points).
    (iii) The extent to which the proposed training content--
    (A) Covers all of the relevant aspects of the subject matter (1 
point); and
    (B) If relevant, is based on new knowledge derived from research 
activities of the proposed project (1 point).
    (iv) The extent to which the proposed training materials, methods, 
and content are appropriate to the trainees, including consideration of 
the skill level of the trainees and the subject matter of the materials 
(2 points).
    (v) The extent to which the proposed training materials and methods 
are accessible to individuals with disabilities (1 point).
    (vi) The extent to which the applicant is able to carry out the 
training activities, either directly or through another entity (2 
points).
    (e) Design of dissemination activities (8 points total).
    (1) The Secretary considers the extent to which the design of 
dissemination activities is likely to be effective in accomplishing the 
objectives of the project.
    (2) In determining the extent to which the design is likely to be 
effective in accomplishing the objectives of the project, the Secretary 
considers the following factors:
    (i) The extent to which the content of the information to be 
disseminated--
    (A) Covers all of the relevant aspects of the subject matter (1 
point); and
    (B) If appropriate, is based on new knowledge derived from research 
activities of the project (1 point).
    (ii) The extent to which the materials to be disseminated are 
likely to be effective and usable, including consideration of their 
quality, clarity, variety, and format (2 points).
    (iii) The extent to which the methods for dissemination are of 
sufficient quality, intensity, and duration (2 points).
    (iv) The extent to which the materials and information to be 
disseminated and the methods for dissemination are appropriate to the 
target population, including consideration of the familiarity of the 
target population with the subject matter, format of the information, 
and subject matter (1 point).
    (v) The extent to which the information to be disseminated will be 
accessible to individuals with disabilities (1 point).
    (f) Design of technical assistance activities (4 points total).
    (1) The Secretary considers the extent to which the design of 
technical assistance activities is likely to be effective in 
accomplishing the objectives of the project.
    (2) In determining the extent to which the design is likely to be 
effective in accomplishing the objectives of the project, the Secretary 
considers the following factors:
    (i) The extent to which the methods for providing technical 
assistance are of sufficient quality, intensity, and duration (1 
point).
    (ii) The extent to which the information to be provided through 
technical assistance covers all of the relevant aspects of the subject 
matter (1 point).
    (iii) The extent to which the technical assistance is appropriate 
to the target population, including consideration of the knowledge 
level of the target population, needs of the target population, and 
format for providing information (1 point).
    (iv) The extent to which the technical assistance is accessible to 
individuals with disabilities (1 point).
    (g) Plan of operation (4 points total).
    (1) The Secretary considers the quality of the plan of operation.

[[Page 36302]]

    (2) In determining the quality of the plan of operation, the 
Secretary considers the following factors:
    (i) The adequacy of the plan of operation to achieve the objectives 
of the proposed project on time and within budget, including clearly 
defined responsibilities, and timelines for accomplishing project tasks 
(2 points).
    (ii) The adequacy of the plan of operation to provide for using 
resources, equipment, and personnel to achieve each objective (2 
points).
    (f) Collaboration (2 points total).
    (1) The Secretary considers the quality of collaboration.
    (2) In determining the quality of collaboration, the Secretary 
considers the following factors:
    (i) The extent to which the applicant's proposed collaboration with 
one or more agencies, organizations, or institutions is likely to be 
effective in achieving the relevant proposed activities of the project 
(1 point).
    (ii) The extent to which agencies, organizations, or institutions 
demonstrate a commitment to collaborate with the applicant (1 point).
    (g) Adequacy and reasonableness of the budget (3 points total).
    (1) The Secretary considers the adequacy and the reasonableness of 
the proposed budget.
    (2) In determining the adequacy and the reasonableness of the 
proposed budget, the Secretary considers the following factors:
    (i) The extent to which the costs are reasonable in relation to the 
proposed project activities (1 point).
    (ii) The extent to which the budget for the project, including any 
subcontracts, is adequately justified to support the proposed project 
activities (2 points).
    (h) Plan of evaluation (7 points total).
    (1) The Secretary considers the quality of the plan of evaluation.
    (2) In determining the quality of the plan of evaluation, the 
Secretary considers the following factors:
    (i) The extent to which the plan of evaluation provides for 
periodic assessment of progress toward--
    (A) Implementing the plan of operation (1 point); and
    (B) Achieving the project's intended outcomes and expected impacts 
(1 point).
    (ii) The extent to which the plan of evaluation will be used to 
improve the performance of the project through the feedback generated 
by its periodic assessments (1 point).
    (iii) The extent to which the plan of evaluation provides for 
periodic assessment of a project's progress that is based on identified 
performance measures that--
    (A) Are clearly related to the intended outcomes of the project and 
expected impacts on the target population (2 points); and
    (B) Are objective, and quantifiable or qualitative, as appropriate 
(2 points).
    (i) Project staff (9 points total).
    (1) The Secretary considers the quality of the project staff.
    (2) In determining the quality of the project staff, the Secretary 
considers the extent to which the applicant encourages applications for 
employment from persons who are members of groups that have 
traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national 
origin, gender, age, or disability (1 point).
    (3) In addition, the Secretary considers the following factors:
    (i) The extent to which the key personnel and other key staff have 
appropriate training and experience in disciplines required to conduct 
all proposed activities (2 points).
    (ii) The extent to which the commitment of staff time is adequate 
to accomplish all the proposed activities of the project (2 points).
    (iii) The extent to which the key personnel are knowledgeable about 
the methodology and literature of pertinent subject areas (2 points).
    (iv) The extent to which the project staff includes outstanding 
scientists in the field (2 points).
    (j) Adequacy and accessibility of resources (4 points).
    (1) The Secretary considers the adequacy and accessibility of the 
applicant's resources to implement the proposed project.
    (2) In determining the adequacy and accessibility of resources, the 
Secretary considers the following factors:
    (i) The extent to which the applicant is committed to provide 
adequate facilities, equipment, other resources, including 
administrative support, and laboratories, if appropriate (1 point).
    (ii) The extent to which the applicant has appropriate access to 
clinical populations and organizations representing individuals with 
disabilities to support advanced clinical rehabilitation research (2 
points).
    (iii) The extent to which the facilities, equipment, and other 
resources are appropriately accessible to individuals with disabilities 
who may use the facilities, equipment, and other resources of the 
project (1 point).

Instructions for Application Narrative

    The Secretary strongly recommends that applicants:
    (1) Include a one-page abstract in their application;
    (2) Limit Part III--Application Narrative to no more than 125 pages 
for RRTCs and 75 pages for projects;
    (3) Use pages that are 8\1/2\ x 11'' (one side only) with one inch 
margins (top, bottom, and sides);
    (4) Double-space (no more than 3 lines per vertical inch) all 
sections of text in the application narrative; and
    (5) Use no smaller than a 12-point font, and an average character 
density no greater than 14 characters per inch.
    The recommended application narrative page limit does not apply to: 
Part I--the electronically scannable form; Part II--the budget section 
(including the narrative budget justification); and Part IV--the 
assurances and certifications. Also, the one-page abstract, resume(s), 
bibliography, or letters of support, while considered part of the 
application, are not subject to the recommended page limitation. 
Applicants should note that reviewers are not required to review any 
information provided in addition to the application information listed 
above.
    The recommendations for double-spacing and font do not apply within 
charts, tables, figures, and graphs, but the information presented in 
those formats should be easily readable.

Instructions for Transmittal of Applications

    (a) If an applicant wants to apply for a grant, the applicant 
shall--
    (1) Mail the original and two copies of the application on or 
before the deadline date to: U.S. Department of Education, Application 
Control Center, Attention: (CFDA # [Applicant must insert number and 
letter]), Washington, D.C. 20202-4725, or
    (2) Hand deliver the original and two copies of the application by 
4:30 p.m. [Washington, D.C. time] on or before the deadline date to: 
U.S. Department of Education, Application Control Center, Attention: 
(CFDA # [Applicant must insert number and letter]), Room #3633, 
Regional Office Building #3, 7th and D Streets, SW., Washington, DC.
    (b) An applicant must show one of the following as proof of 
mailing:
    (1) A legibly dated U.S. Postal Service postmark.
    (2) A legible mail receipt with the date of mailing stamped by the 
U.S. Postal Service.
    (3) A dated shipping label, invoice, or receipt from a commercial 
carrier.
    (4) Any other proof of mailing acceptable to the Secretary.
    (c) If an application is mailed through the U.S. Postal Service, 
the Secretary does not accept either of the following as proof of 
mailing:
    (1) A private metered postmark.

[[Page 36303]]

    (2) A mail receipt that is not dated by the U.S. Postal Service.

    Notes: (1) The U.S. Postal Service does not uniformly provide a 
dated postmark. Before relying on this method, an applicant should 
check with its local post office.

    (2) An applicant wishing to know that its application has been 
received by the Department must include with the application a stamped 
self-addressed postcard containing the CFDA number and title of this 
program.
    (3) The applicant must indicate on the envelope and--if not 
provided by the Department--in Item 10 of the Application for Federal 
Assistance (Standard Form 424) the CFDA number--and letter, if any--of 
the competition under which the application is being submitted.

Application Forms and Instructions

    The appendix to this application is divided into four parts. These 
parts are organized in the same manner that the submitted application 
should be organized. These parts are as follows:

    PART I: Application for Federal Assistance (Standard Form 424 
(Rev. 4-88)) and instructions.
    PART II: Budget Form--Non-Construction Programs (Standard Form 
524A) and instructions.
    PART III: Application Narrative.

Additional Materials

    Estimated Public Reporting Burden.
    Assurances--Non-Construction Programs (Standard Form 424B).
    Certification Regarding Lobbying, Debarment, Suspension, and Other 
Responsibility Matters: and Drug-Free Work-Place Requirements (ED Form 
80-0013).
    Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, Ineligibility and 
Voluntary Exclusion: Lower Tier Covered Transactions (ED Form 80-0014) 
and instructions. (Note: ED Form GCS-014 is intended for the use of 
primary participants and should not be transmitted to the Department.)
    Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (Standard Form LLL (if 
applicable) and instructions; and Disclosure of Lobbying Activities 
Continuation Sheet (Standard Form LLL-A).
    An applicant may submit information on a photostatic copy of the 
application and budget forms, the assurances, and the certifications. 
However, the application form, the assurances, and the certifications 
must each have an original signature. No grant may be awarded unless a 
completed application form has been received.
    For Applications Contact: The Grants and Contracts Service Team 
(GCST), Department of Education, 600 Independence Avenue S.W., Switzer 
Building, 3317, Washington, D.C. 20202, or call (202) 205-8207. 
Individuals who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may 
call the TDD number at (202) 205-9860. The preferred method for 
requesting information is to FAX your request to (202) 205-8717.
    Individuals with disabilities may obtain a copy of the application 
package in an alternate format by contacting the GCST. However, the 
Department is not able to reproduce in an alternate format the standard 
forms included in the application package.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Donna Nangle, U.S. Department of 
Education, 600 Maryland Avenue, S.W., room 3418, Switzer Building, 
Washington, D.C. 20202-2645. Telephone: (202) 205-5880. Individuals who 
use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the TDD 
number at (202) 205-2742. Internet: Donna2/3N<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#f3929d949f96b39697dd949c85"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="d2b3bcb5beb792b7b6fcb5bda4">[email protected]</span></a>
    Individuals with disabilities may obtain this document in an 
alternate format (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, or computer 
diskette) on request to the contact person listed in the preceding 
paragraph.

Electronic Access to This Document

    Anyone may view this document, as well as all other Department of 
Education documents published in the Federal Register, in text or 
portable document format (pdf) on the World Wide Web at either of the 
following sites:

http://ocfo.ed.gov/fedreg.htm
http://www.ed.gov/news.html

To use the pdf you must have the Adobe Acrobat Reader Program with 
Search, which is available free at either of the preceding sites. If 
you have questions about using the pdf, call the U.S. Government 
Printing Office at (202) 512-1530 or, toll free at 1-888-293-6498.
    Anyone may also view these documents in text copy only on an 
electronic bulletin board of the Department. Telephone: (202) 219-1511 
or, toll free, 1-800-222-4922. The documents are located under Option 
G--Files/Announcements, Bulletins and Press Releases.

    Note: The official version of this document is the document 
published in the Federal Register.

    Program Authority: 29 U.S.C. 760-762.

    Dated: June 26, 1998.
Judith E. Heumann,
Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services.

Appendix--Application Forms and Instructions

    Applicants are advised to reproduce and complete the application 
forms in this section. Applicants are required to submit an original 
and two copies of each application as provided in this section. 
However, applicants are encouraged to submit an original and seven 
copies of each application in order to facilitate the peer review 
process and minimize copying errors.

Frequent Questions

1. Can I Get an Extension of the Due Date?

    No! On rare occasions the Department of Education may extend a 
closing date for all applicants. If that occurs, a notice of the 
revised due date is published in the Federal Register. However, 
there are no extensions or exceptions to the due date made for 
individual applicants.

2. What Should be Included in the Application?

    The application should include a project narrative, vitae of key 
personnel, and a budget, as well as the Assurances forms included in 
this package. Vitae of staff or consultants should include the 
individual's title and role in the proposed project, and other 
information that is specifically pertinent to this proposed project. 
The budgets for both the first year and all subsequent project years 
should be included.
    If collaboration with another organization is involved in the 
proposed activity, the application should include assurances of 
participation by the other parties, including written agreements or 
assurances of cooperation. It is not useful to include general 
letters of support or endorsement in the application.
    If the applicant proposes to use unique tests or other 
measurement instruments that are not widely known in the field, it 
would be helpful to include the instrument in the application.
    Many applications contain voluminous appendices that are not 
helpful and in many cases cannot even be mailed to the reviewers. It 
is generally not helpful to include such things as brochures, 
general capability statements of collaborating organizations, maps, 
copies of publications, or descriptions of other projects completed 
by the applicant.

3. What Format Should be Used for the Application?

    NIDRR generally advises applicants that they may organize the 
application to follow the selection criteria that will be used. The 
specific review criteria vary according to the specific program and 
are contained in this Consolidated Application Package.

[[Page 36304]]

4. May I Submit Applications to More Than One NIDRR Program 
Competition or More Than One Application to a Program?

    Yes, you may submit applications to any program for which they 
are responsive to the program requirements. You may submit the same 
application to as many competitions as you believe appropriate. You 
may also submit more than one application in any given competition.

5. What is the Allowable Indirect Cost Rate?

    The limits on indirect costs vary according to the program and 
the type of application.
    An applicant for an RRTC is limited to an indirect cost rate of 
15 percent.
    An applicant for a Disability and Rehabilitation Research 
Project should limit indirect charges to the organization's approved 
indirect cost rate. If the organization does not have an approved 
indirect cost rate, the application should include an estimated 
actual rate.

6. Can Profitmaking Businesses Apply for Grants?

    Yes. However, for-profit organizations will not be able to 
collect a fee or profit on the grant, and in some programs will be 
required to share in the costs of the project.

7. Can Individuals Apply for Grants?

    No. Only organizations are eligible to apply for grants under 
NIDRR programs. However, individuals are the only entities eligible 
to apply for fellowships.

8. Can NIDRR Staff Advise me Whether my Project is of Interest to 
NIDRR or Likely to be Funded?

    No. NIDRR staff can advise you of the requirements of the 
program in which you propose to submit your application. However, 
staff cannot advise you of whether your subject area or proposed 
approach is likely to receive approval.

9. How Do I Assure That my Application Will be Referred to the Most 
Appropriate Panel for Review?

    Applicants should be sure that their applications are referred 
to the correct competition by clearly including the competition 
title and CFDA number, including alphabetical code, on the Standard 
Form 424, and including a project title that describes the project.

10. How Soon After Submitting my Application Can I Find Out if it 
Will be Funded?

    The time from closing date to grant award date varies from 
program to program. Generally speaking, NIDRR endeavors to have 
awards made within five to six months of the closing date. 
Unsuccessful applicants generally will be notified within that time 
frame as well. For the purpose of estimating a project start date, 
the applicant should estimate approximately six months from the 
closing date, but no later than the following September 30.

11. Can I Call NIDRR to Find Out if my Application is Being Funded?

    No. When NIDRR is able to release information on the status of 
grant applications, it will notify applicants by letter. The results 
of the peer review cannot be released except through this formal 
notification.

12. If my Application is Successful, Can I Assume I Will Get the 
Requested Budget Amount in Subsequent Years?

    No. Funding in subsequent years is subject to availability of 
funds and project performance.

13. Will all Approved Applications be Funded?

    No. It often happens that the peer review panels approve for 
funding more applications than NIDRR can fund within available 
resources. Applicants who are approved but not funded are encouraged 
to consider submitting similar applications in future competitions.

BILLING CODE 4000-01-P

[[Page 36305]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN02JY98.000



[[Page 36306]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN02JY98.001



[[Page 36307]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN02JY98.002



[[Page 36308]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN02JY98.003



[[Page 36309]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN02JY98.004



BILLING CODE 4001-01-C

[[Page 36310]]

    Public reporting burden for these collections of information is 
estimated to average 30 hours per response, including the time for 
reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering 
and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the 
collection of information.
    Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect 
of these collections of information, including suggestions for 
reducing this burden, to the: U.S. Department of Education, 
Information Management and Compliance Division, Washington, D.C. 
20202-4651; and Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction 
Project 1820-0027, Washington, D.C. 20503. Disability and 
Rehabilitation Research Projects (CFDA No. 84.133A) 34 CFR Part 350 
Subpart B. Rehabilitation Research and Training Center (CFDA No. 
84.133B) 34 CFR Part 350 Subpart C.

Notice to All Applicants

    Thank you for your interest in this program. The purpose of this 
enclosure is to inform you about a new provision in the Department 
of Education's General Education Provisions Act (GEPA) that applies 
to applicants for new grant awards under Department programs. This 
provision is section 427 of GEPA, enacted as part of the Improving 
America's Schools Act of 1994 (Pub. L. 103-382).

To Whom Does This Provision Apply?

    Section 427 of GEPA affects applicants for new discretionary 
grant awards under this program. ALL APPLICANTS FOR NEW AWARDS MUST 
INCLUDE INFORMATION IN THEIR APPLICATION TO ADDRESS THIS NEW 
PROVISION IN ORDER TO RECEIVE FUNDING UNDER THIS PROGRAM.

What Does This Provision Require?

    Section 427 requires each applicant for funds (other than on 
individual person) to include in its application a description of 
the steps the applicant proposes to take to ensure equitable access 
to, and participation in, its federally assisted program for 
students, teachers, and other program beneficiaries with special 
needs.
    This section allows applicants discretion in developing the 
required description. The statute highlights six types of barriers 
that can impede equitable access or participation that you may 
address: gender, race, national origin, color, disability, or age. 
Based on local circumstances, you can determine whether these or 
other barriers may prevent your students, teachers, etc. from 
equitable access or participation. Your description need not be 
lengthy; you may provide a clear and succinct description of how you 
plan to address those barriers that are applicable to your 
circumstances. In addition, the information may be provided in a 
single narrative, or, if appropriate, may be discussed in connection 
with related topics in the application.
    Section 427 is not intended to duplicate the requirement of 
civil rights statutes, but rather to ensure that, in designing their 
projects, applicants for Federal funds address equity concerns that 
may affect the ability of certain potential beneficiaries to fully 
participate in the project and to achieve to high standards. 
Consistent with program requirements and its approved application, 
an applicant may use the Federal funds awarded to its to eliminate 
barriers it identifies.

What are Examples of How an Applicant Might Satisfy the Requirement 
of This Provision?

    The following examples may help illustrate how an applicant may 
comply with section 427.
    (1) An applicant that proposes to carryout an adult literacy 
project serving, among others, adults with limited English 
proficiency, might describe in its application how it intends to 
distribute a brochure about the proposed project to such potential 
participants in their native language.
    (2) An applicant that proposes to develop instructional 
materials for classroom use might describe how it will make the 
materials available on audio tape or in braille for students who are 
blind.
    (3) An applicant that proposes to carry out a model science 
program for secondary students and is concerned that girls may be 
less likely than boys to enroll in the course, might indicate how it 
intends to conduct ``outreach'' efforts to girls, to encourage their 
enrollment.
    We recognize that many applicants may already be implementing 
effective steps to ensure equity of access and participation in 
their grant programs, and we appreciate your cooperation in 
responding to the requirements of this provision.

Estimated Burden Statement

    According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, no persons are 
required to respond to a collection of information unless it 
displays a valid OMB control number. The valid OMB control number 
for this information collection is 1801-0004 (Exp. 8/31/98). The 
time required to complete this information collection is estimated 
to vary from 1 to 3 hours per response, with an average of 1.5 
hours, including the time to review instructions, search existing 
data resources, gather and maintain the data needed, and complete 
and review the information collection. If you have any comments 
concerning the accuracy of the time estimate(s) or suggestions for 
improving this form, please write to: U.S. Department of Education, 
Washington, DC 20202-4651.
BILLING CODE 4001-01-P

[[Page 36311]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN02JY98.005



[[Page 36312]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN02JY98.006



[[Page 36313]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN02JY98.007



[[Page 36314]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN02JY98.008



[[Page 36315]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN02JY98.009



[[Page 36316]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN02JY98.010



[[Page 36317]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN02JY98.011



BILLING CODE 4000-01-C

[[Page 36318]]

DUNS Number Instructions

    D-U-N-S No.: Please provide the applicant's D-U-N-S Number. You 
can obtain your D-U-N-S Number at no charge by calling 1-800-333-
0505 or by completing a D-U-N-S Number Request Form. The form can be 
obtained via the Internet at the following URL:

http://www.dnb.com/dbis/aboutdb/intlduns.htm

    The D-U-N-S Number is a unique nine-digit number that does not 
convey any information about the recipient. A built in check digit 
helps assure the accuracy of the D-U-N-S Number. The ninth digit of 
each number is the check digit, which is mathematically related to 
the other digits. It lets computer systems determine if a D-U-N-S 
Number has been entered correctly.
    Dun & Bradstreet, a global information services provider, has 
assigned D-U-N-S numbers to over 43 million companies worldwide.

[FR Doc. 98-17583 Filed 7-1-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>